Comparative Religion: Godmen

angelica

Ahnimus wrote:

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/try

I'm asking about your own interpretation of what "try" symbolizes.

Ahnimus

angelica wrote:

I'm asking about your own interpretation of what "try" symbolizes.

I use the english definition

angelica

Ahnimus wrote:

I use the english definition

When you are hiding your personal self and the symbolism that happens in your head, it looks like you are defensive.

Ahnimus

angelica wrote:

When you are hiding your personal self and the symbolism that happens in your head, it looks like you are defensive.

Could you explain your use of the following words

When
You
Are
Hiding
Your
Personal
Self
And
The
Symbolism
That
Happens
In
Head
It
Looks
Like
Defensive

I use the english language.

Ahnimus

I can't believe you don't see how perverse this question is.

Let's make the most ludicrously perverse assertions about indeterminism and determinism.

Indeterminism
There is no time, no cause and effect
Everything happens at the same time, caused by themselves.
Up is not the opposite of Down
It is impossible to explain actions
Billiard balls spontaneously move around without cause
Trial by Jury is immoral because the Jury's verdict is indeterminant
There is no such thing as motive
The brain does not exist

Determinism
Choices are impossible, there are no forks in any roads
People are identical to robots and only perform basic input and output
There is no such thing as morality
There is no 'I' in me
Murder is completely justified

Ok, see, these are perverse interpretations of these concepts. They are utterly ridiculous every last one of them.

Kann

Ahnimus wrote:

I can't believe you don't see how perverse this question is.

I don't see what is so perverse about the question. From what I understood of determinism (and I have to admit you are my main source on the subject) if prior causes cannot allow you to feel forgiving and loving toward what you may view as enemies what exactly does trying mean?

angelica

Ahnimus wrote:

Could you explain your use of the following words

When
You
Are
Hiding
Your
Personal
Self
And
The
Symbolism
That
Happens
In
Head
It
Looks
Like
Defensive

I use the english language.

Are you saying you are completely oblivious to the base nature of the thought in your mind before it takes on the symbolism of language?

Ahnimus

Kann wrote:

I don't see what is so perverse about the question. From what I understood of determinism (and I have to admit you are my main source on the subject) if prior causes cannot allow you to feel forgiving and loving toward what you may view as enemies what exactly does trying mean?

"if prior causes cannot allow you to feel forgiving and loving toward what you may view as enemies"

My view is exactly the opposite of that.

Perhaps you can explain how free-will enables a person to forgive and love their enemies?

With determinism you know that their intent was not entirely their own and thus it's easy to love and forgive everyone. However, with free-will, the individual is the ultimate source of intent, and 100% morally responsible.

Ahnimus

angelica wrote:

Are you saying you are completely oblivious to the base nature of the thought in your mind before it takes on the symbolism of language?

I'm saying it's a stupid question.

Try, an attempt at something.

The ball tried to go through the wall, but the elasticity of the balls surface interacted with the solidity of the wall and the ball was deflected.

angelica

Ahnimus wrote:

"if prior causes cannot allow you to feel forgiving and loving toward what you may view as enemies"

My view is exactly the opposite of that.

Perhaps you can explain how free-will enables a person to forgive and love their enemies?

With determinism you know that their intent was not entirely their own and thus it's easy to love and forgive everyone. However, with free-will, the individual is the ultimate source of intent, and 100% morally responsible.

And with both free-will and determinism, you have both to complement each other.

Ahnimus

angelica wrote:

And with both free-will and determinism, you have both to complement each other.

They are in conflict with each other Angelica. Your debate tactics are getting really old.

Kann

Ahnimus wrote:

"if prior causes cannot allow you to feel forgiving and loving toward what you may view as enemies"

My view is exactly the opposite of that.

Perhaps you can explain how free-will enables a person to forgive and love their enemies?

With determinism you know that their intent was not entirely their own and thus it's easy to love and forgive everyone. However, with free-will, the individual is the ultimate source of intent, and 100% morally responsible.

That's why the act of forgiveness is (well at least should be) so revered in christianism.
But that doesn't answer my question, should people who are unable to forgive stop trying?

Ahnimus

Kann wrote:

That's why the act of forgiveness is (well at least should be) so revered in christianism.
But that doesn't answer my question, should people who are unable to forgive stop trying?

Who is unable to forgive? And what is stopping them?

Ahnimus

btw, I think I misinterpreted your question Kann. You were saying that if someone is previously determined to be unable to forgive someone, right?

I would suggest that there inability to forgive has a lot to do with how they are attributing cause.

Kann

Ahnimus wrote:

Who is unable to forgive? And what is stopping them?

I'm not sure.
And the lack of free will, if you're unable to feel forgiveness surely you can't choose to forgive.

Ahnimus

Kann wrote:

I'm not sure.
And the lack of free will, if you're unable to feel forgiveness surely you can't choose to forgive.

I'm not sure what forgiveness feels like. But many people have done horrible things to me and I don't blame them.

angelica

Ahnimus wrote:

I'm not sure what forgiveness feels like. But many people have done horrible things to me and I don't blame them.

I've heard forgiveness described as to "give" as be"fore". Which the source interepreted to mean that you are clear of the situation, just as if it did not happen. It's not the same as forgetting however, but it's being void of tension/anger/hostility etc. Sometimes forgiveness entails a willingness to forgive and yet still takes many steps before the situation to be forgiven is balanced out.

Ahnimus

Watch this video that describes "Wanting" and talks about some of the ideas of Douglas Hofstadter
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5CbZ8yWSDv0

Check out more vids from TheModernMystic he's pretty smart about this stuff.

angelica

Ahnimus wrote:

angelica wrote:

And with both free-will and determinism, you have both to complement each other.

They are in conflict with each other Angelica. Your debate tactics are getting really old.

And here we have two different points of view. In Ahnimus' beliefs or experience, free-will and determinism conflict with each other.

In my experience, determinism and free-will co-exist peacefully.

for example, Ahnimus says this: "With determinism you know that their intent was not entirely their own and thus it's easy to love and forgive everyone. However, with free-will, the individual is the ultimate source of intent, and 100% morally responsible."

In my view, where both determinism and free-will co-exist peacefully, I know that people's determined behaviours are often not conscious, and therefore people are not always aware of their intentions. And I find it's easy to understand most things people do, and to not even blame or accuse or need to forgive to begin with. And with believing in the free-will aspect, I also simultaneiously know that people are morally responsible for their each action. And they are responsible for what they have not yet learned and for the mistakes they make due to lack of awareness that causes them to suffer consequences with universal law. Universal moral law is also interconnected with the subjective background of each individual. So this moral law including judgment based on the law cannot be made externally by humans because we are not privy to the full understanding to entitle judgment. Our human ideas that we are "bad" and "sinners" come from our imperfections and lack of understanding and from our own judgment of our flaws. The universal force loves us unconditionally, and embraces us unconditionally, in each moment, and certainly "before" or "beyond" our human lives. It is our own perception that believes in separation from our base Source, and it is this separation that prevents our union with the Source in this life and beyond.

Within this context, the determined cause and effect blends seamlessly in reality with the moral responsibility. The only conflicts arise in how we think about these concepts, which are based on personal inner conflict in the individual who sees conflict.

angelica

Oh, and to add, the reason we are responsible for even our unconscious choices, is because we also ARE our unconscious choices. We are so caught up in our ego awareness, and our ideas of separation and our humanness, we've essentially lost touch with our truth--our Presence--that resonates in our each cell. And yet that truth--the truth of our full existence--is there in each moment, regardless of our good ego opinions about it's truth. We do everything, whether conscious of it or not, for good reason. We've become so entranced with sensory delights from without, we've lost touch with who we are and our inherent truths. We choose everything in our lives at all times, even when we make these choices from beyond the "veils" of awareness. Our existence as separate ego is said in psychology to be the tip of the iceberg of who we are. This is why who we are as our Higher Self, our Presence or the full self, is SO vibrant and full and real, compared to the seeming illusions of the egotistic, false, and conflicted surface ego-self.